VERIFIKASI METODE IN SILICO UNTUK PREDIKSI TOKSISITAS SENYAWA BAHAN TAMBAHAN PANGAN
Due to development of computation technology, toxicity prediction of a chemical compound can be performed using computational or in silico methods. The in silico approach to screen hazardous/toxicity properties has begun to be widely used by researchers and also be used in establishing regulation...
Saved in:
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | Final Project |
| 語言: | Indonesia |
| 在線閱讀: | https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/61920 |
| 標簽: |
添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
|
| 機構: | Institut Teknologi Bandung |
| 語言: | Indonesia |
| 總結: | Due to development of computation technology, toxicity prediction of a chemical compound can be
performed using computational or in silico methods. The in silico approach to screen
hazardous/toxicity properties has begun to be widely used by researchers and also be used in
establishing regulations in several European countries. One of the software that can be used for
toxicity prediction is VEGA. The aim of this study was to verify in silico method that can be used as
initial safety assessment of the compounds proposed as food additives . The software verification was
conducted using positive control and negative control compounds and then followed by assessment
of test compounds. 150 food additive compounds were selected as the test compounds, which belong
to the functional classes of flavours, antioxidants, sweeteners, preservatives, and colors. Verification
parameters were sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictivity, negative predictivity, false
positive rate, false negative rate, and receiver operating characteristic. The prediction methods that
meet the acceptance requirements were then used to predict the toxicity of food additives and the
results of them were compared with their experimental data. The prediction method showing the
least prediction error was then considered as the best method for toxicity prediction. In
hepatotoxicity, the prediction method did not meet the acceptance requirements, while for
carcinogenicity, only 2 prediction methods passed the acceptance requirements, which are CAESAR
and IRFMN/Antares. After comparing the two methods, IRFMN/Antares gave better results than
CAESAR. In developmental toxicity, the PG method was better than the CAESAR model. In the case of
skin sensitization end-point, no test compound was tested due no method meets the acceptance
requirements. In terms of mutagenicity, the SarPy/IRFMN method was the best method, followed by
the CAESAR , the ISS, and KNN methods.
|
|---|